[pathdoc]

This is why I said "apparent focal lengths".

[BillO]

It just captures the view of a 450mm lens but does no actual magnification.

Technically, a camera is only about angle of view. You only really get magnification in systems where you have two lenses like in a telescope, microscope or binoculars. In those cases the magnification is the ratio of the objective/eyepiece.

[MadMathMind]

How do you guys find all these jerks, anyway? I'm a part of a couple photography groups and we *never* talk about the specifics of equipment, outside of "I really love this lens." I think Canon is the most represented in these groups but...no one cares. Seriously.

We don't even talk about "Full frame" or "crop" aside from when it's relevant to discuss focal lengths and FoV.

[NS_Sailor]

I've just skimmed through the post in this thread and like everything that is mass produced it is all about marketing.
How many people you know will only use an I-Phone or I-Pad and would never look at Android product that costs less and in some cases has many of the functions that I-Phone or I-Pad still does not have. I personally have an Android tablet which I purchased 4 years ago at a quarter of the price of an I-pad which has hardware options which even some more current I-pads do not have, namely a fully functional USB port. This is a great option when it comes time to show your most recent shots on a larger screen either directly from the camera or USB Card reader
Canon and Nikon are, in my opinion, following the same strategy as Apple, by flooding the market with overpriced equipment, convincing customers through slick marketing to upgrade to the next best model by adding small features and building in obsolescence into their older equipment.
Ricoh/Pentax on the other hand has taken the stance of learning from the mistakes of the Canon & Nikon by developing a reasonably priced product that contains all the functions of the comparable Canon and Nikon models plus some cutting edge technology, that is compatible with all legacy products of the same brand.

[BillO]

You meet equipment geeks in every walk of life now an then. I would not say I not have met too many real pros that get into pissing contests over brand names, but the ones you do meet are hard to forget I guess.

[Colbyt]

The sad fact is that a lot of people feel the need to justify their choices by insulting the choices of others. The truth is there no perfect <insert any noun>.

If you are pleased with the choices you made who gives a rat's hind end what anyone else thinks? I don't require the approval of others to be happy in my life.

[mikeSF]

...
Canon and Nikon are, in my opinion, following the same strategy as Apple, by flooding the market with overpriced equipment, convincing customers through slick marketing to upgrade to the next best model by adding small features and building in obsolescence into their older equipment....

i remain baffled why so many fall into this slick scheme. It is so obvious.

[totsmuyco]

I've used almost every brand since the 80s. I'm now with Pentax and I'm happy where I am. I wouldn't mind what other people say as I have done my research before going into Pentax. My reasons are good enough for me after all, it's me who'll be using my gears.

[pathdoc]

convincing customers through slick marketing to upgrade to the next best model by adding small features and building in obsolescence into their older equipment.

That being said, it takes a certain mindset to bite at this bait. I look at all the things I would be gaining if I coughed up the money for a K-3 or K3-ii right now - higher resolution sensor, better AF, Pixel Shift (if I go the K3-ii route), two SD slots, and so on and so forth... but at the end of the day, my K-5 takes perfectly good pictures, thank you. When it stops working, I will move up to something better (which at this rate, touch wood, should be the full-frame), and I'm sure I'll be glad of all the juicy extras, just as I was glad of the performance boost and the juicy extras when I moved up to the K-5 from the *ist-DL. But that move was triggered specifically by the death of the *ist-DL, which until then had been doing a very good job, thank you. Sure, today's rooster is tomorrow's feather duster, but that feather duster was still the king of the barnyard once upon a time and did a perfectly good job at crowing-in the dawn and servicing the hens.

[Canada_Rockies]

pathdoc, you have put it into words. I went from the K10 to the K3. Better AF? More megapickels? Nope, less noise at higher ISO and a quiet shutter. I try to take decent pictures of birds. K10 at ISO 1600 is trashed by the K3 at 9000. I get shutter speeds at dawn and dusk that are useful. The quiet shutter on the K3 is a nice bonus.

I bought a used one for C$525 from a reputable dealer. It will last me a while.

1. First Pentax, from a pawn shop in 1961.The original 1/25 etc. 55/2.2 preset.
2. Second Pentax when the shutters wore out in 1978 - a KX. Talk about a tank.
3. 1982. Third Pentax when I was shooting sports and wanted a winder and couldn't afford an LX - SF-1.
4. 2000. To have a camera to use when my wife appropriated the SF-1 - MZ-S (Lovely little camera).
5. 2007. When my father passed on (3 months short of 103) and left a few dollars and it was getting really awkward to have film developed, K10 and three lenses.
6. 2015. The K3.

[KC0PET]

More megapickels?

My niece would go for that reason

It is a shame that some people feel the need to slam the brand another chooses. I did a lot of research before I bought a Pentax. At the end of the day the differences are pretty small between "similar" models of Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc. I have my reasons for buying a Pentax, another has their reason for buying a Nikon, etc. No reason to be a snob about it.

[pathdoc]

And we can all have legitimate reasons for NOT picking a certain brand. Not liking the ergonomics or the menu layouts or some other feature of a brand is good enough, and eliminates the need to get personal.

[Canada_Rockies]

And we can all have legitimate reasons for NOT picking a certain brand. Not liking the ergonomics or the menu layouts or some other feature of a brand is good enough, and eliminates the need to get personal.

I dislike Canon. I don't dislike the cameras; I dislike any firm that obsoletes its users as they have done twice. So my objection to Canon is "Political".

[pathdoc]

I don't dislike the cameras; I dislike any firm that obsoletes its users as they have done twice.

At least Asahi had the smarts to move to a mount that was retro-compatible (with an adapter) with all their old lenses. It must have sucked to move from a Spotmatic F or ES-type and suddenly lose open metering with all your SMC-Takumar lenses, but those moving up from the basic Spottie to a K-camera would not have taken as much of a hit. Although I recently (too recently!!) discovered that once you have your aperture and shutter speed good to go, you CAN take multiple shots on the Spotmatic without stopping down every time and the aperture will cycle. So you do lose that. But at least they had the glass, and could mount it on their new camera body without compatibility issues. Even the M-series cameras' instruction manuals that I've seen stressed the availability of the M42-K adapter, so Asahi didn't just dump their older customers in a heap and walk away the instant they changed mounts.

[normhead]

I've just skimmed through the post in this thread and like everything that is mass produced it is all about marketing.
How many people you know will only use an I-Phone or I-Pad and would never look at Android product that costs less and in some cases has many of the functions that I-Phone or I-Pad still does not have. I personally have an Android tablet which I purchased 4 years ago at a quarter of the price of an I-pad which has hardware options which even some more current I-pads do not have, namely a fully functional USB port. This is a great option when it comes time to show your most recent shots on a larger screen either directly from the camera or USB Card reader
Canon and Nikon are, in my opinion, following the same strategy as Apple, by flooding the market with overpriced equipment, convincing customers through slick marketing to upgrade to the next best model by adding small features and building in obsolescence into their older equipment.
Ricoh/Pentax on the other hand has taken the stance of learning from the mistakes of the Canon & Nikon by developing a reasonably priced product that contains all the functions of the comparable Canon and Nikon models plus some cutting edge technology, that is compatible with all legacy products of the same brand.

I'm the opposite of you, although I'm an Apple and Pentax user, so I understand why people use both. When Steve Jobs came back to Apple he streamed 33 product lines into 4 lines. What that did for Apple was, it meant they could buy quality components for cheaper than their competitors could by cheaper components. It simplified their supply chain. Apple product is almost never warehoused by Apple, cutting out costs in the supply chain, most Apple sales are direct to dealer or direct to customer. Like Apple, Pentax uses a reduced product line re-useing the same high quality components in may cameras, giving them more purchasing power and lowering cost per part. They tend to go for quality, reliable components like Apple, and provide a ruggedness and toughness , and longevity not matched by their competitors. And this based on my experience. One of my Apple laptops is now 13 years old and functioning exactly the way it did when i first bought. Still good for meal. One of my systems before that lasted 16 years in my house and two more years in the student's I gave it to. IN the 20 odd trips I've guided in the last 5 years, I've seen one Canon and one high end Nikon product die because they couldn't handle the physical demands of a canoe trip. That is a very small sample, but, just saying. So, I guess who is Apple and who is android depends on your perspective. But from my perspective, Pentax is definitely Apple, they may not be cutting edge in terms development and functionality, but they are solid, built to last forever, probably longer than you'll want to use it, always thoughtful in terms of ease of use.